In some places, such as TN, you can go to court and they will send you to traffic school. There’ll still be a fine, but it won’t hit your record and cause your insurance to go up, which usually dwarfs the fine.

I live in Florida and my sister in Colorado. I was visiting her about 9 months ago and she generously lent me her car while I was there. We don’t have the photo tickets in Florida. Well, I went through a Florida green light and saw what appeared to be a lightning bolt...got flashed. My sister was upset (she was riding with me) and told me in her oh so gentle way I just cost her money and she will get the ticket blah...blah...blah...well being the bratty little brother that I am, on that ride home, I compiled several other pictures. My sister was absolutely apoplectic on arrival to her home 8-)

52
posted on 05/03/2012 9:58:06 AM PDT
by gas_dr
(Trial lawyers AND POLITICIANS are Endangering Every Patient in America)

“If one of these sort of tickets ever shows up in my mail box, Ill be inclined to treat it as the junk mail that is is (especially one for speeding - I do have a little more respect for red lights).”

Exactly! There is actually no proof of service. When you get a ticket from a cop, you sign the ticket and “promise to appear.” Nothing like that happens with photo radar. It’s also good to find out how the local Traffic Court Judge views these “citations.” Our’s would not recognize them on the basis of lack of proof of service.

“The REAL BITCH about this is it it a Council Bluffs Iowa Ticket and when we got (w/out a hearing) found responsible the Paper sait to mail the fine(extortion) to Cleveland Ohio. I HATE IOWA sometimes!”

The Cleveland Ohio address that you send the “fine” to is more than likely the company that leased the camera to the town in Iowa.

It is a major scam because they claim it’s for “safety” yet the camera companies and the cities/towns never provide any proof to back up their claims.

Two, up to 80% of the “fine” goes to the company that owns the camera system.

Three, they always install the cameras at intersections where there is high tractor trailer or out of state traffic knowing full well that the truck drivers, companies, and out of state motorists will just pay the fine instead of contesting it.

Four, a lot of times they don’t post signs warning that there is a camera at the intersection, or have it posted in such a way that it’s either not easily visible, or too close to the intersection thus not giving ample warning.

Sometimes state laws prohibit “remote” devices such as red light and speed cameras. I know that there was one state that got sued because they would have a state trooper in an unmarked van or SUV sitting on the side of the road with a radar, and down the road were marked cars doing the actual stops. The suit was because the trooper with the radar wasn’t the one physically making the stops. You know the whole right to face one’s accuser and all. The state lost the suit.

54
posted on 05/03/2012 10:06:38 AM PDT
by 2CAVTrooper
( For those who have had to fight for it, freedom has a flavor the protected shall never know.)

When they installed these in downtown Redding, I quit shopping there, and let the city council know why. Switched to nearby Anderson instead. These were installed supposedly to improve safety of a couple problem intersections, but they were clearly reveneue generators hyped by certain councilmen and the out-of-state company that operated the cameras. The fines were huge, and the city only got a small percentage of. The out-of-state camera operating company got to keep most of the revenue generated. Some people felt these cameras actually caused more accidents due to people slamming their breaks on yellow and getting rear ended because of fear of these cameras catching them in the intersection on red.

I live in a county that has speed cameras and red light cameras everywhere! I do not believe anyone in our county has successfully fought it. IMHO, pay the ticket (or have her pay it) and be done with it. The ONLY good part of this whole mess is that it doesn’t carry points. It is essentially like a “parking” ticket. That is, the owner of the car (not the driver) is responsible for the fine. I personally believe that some areas reduce the amount of time between the yellow and red in order to “catch” more violators thus increasing their revenue but that is a whole new enchilada. IMHO.

If you haven’t been officially served with a photo radar ticket, you can JUST THROW IT AWAY!

Before you get too far here, we strongly recommend that you consult an attorney. Do NOT rely on any advice presented here. These tactics are theories and suggestions only, it will be YOUR responsibility to research the legitimacy and practicality of these approaches as they apply to your situation.http://photoradarscam.com/getout.php

I’ve been wondering as well. My son said he was going through a green light and saw the flash. It flashed several times because several cars were going through that green light since it was GREEN. How on earth do you fight these things? Especially when you didn’t run a red light.

In order to make more money some just make the yellow light variable. The traffic camera people make more money than the city, but they are not placed there for safety, anyone that thinks so is delusional.

71
posted on 05/03/2012 10:38:48 AM PDT
by itsahoot
(I will not vote for Romney period, and by election day you won't like him either.)

Good on you! Witnessed three teenage girls run a red light, T-Bone a van with a young man just released from the hospital after neck surgery, he was wearing a halo. By the grace of God alone no one was hurt, girls argued about the light, but I witnessed it and gave my testimony. They have to learn even if it is the hard way.

“An amber light lasts long enough for one to clear the intersection if it comes on as one enters it.”

This used to be true, but, unfortunately it’s not always the case, especially in areas with red light cameras. Studies have found that jurisdictions that implement red light cameras will usually also shorten the duration of yellow lights around the same time.

Request a court date. When the day comes, go to court, like a boss.Act possessed, like a boss.Kick and thrash, like a boss.Yell obscenities, like a boss. Attack the judge, like a boss. Go for the ballif's gun, like a boss. strip your clothes off, like a boss. Grow 12 feet tall, like a boss. Tear the ceiling off, like a boss. Turn into a jet, like a boss. Bomb the Russians, like a boss. Crash into the sun, like a boss.

I would think that if one can prove that the amber light came on just as one entered the intersection the ticket would be dismissed.Obviously, if the light came on then there would be no time to stop.I’m just applying common sense which, I realize, might not agree with a law that is intended for revenue enhancement.

78
posted on 05/03/2012 11:05:42 AM PDT
by luvbach1
(Stop the destruction in 2012 or continue the decline)

An amber light lasts long enough for one to clear the intersection if it comes on as one enters it.

The signal timing should be set up that way but is not always correct. Some locals have changed the timing on the signals to be able to ticket more people. The length of the yellow should be timed and then compared to what the state law/Transportation Department say the minimum should be. If the timing is correct the then pay the fine if not you can fight it in court.

Anybody tried this product? From the website: "A majority of red light & speed cameras utilize a strong flash to photograph the license plate on your car. Once sprayed on your license plate, PhotoBlockers special formula produces a high-powered gloss that reflects the flash back towards the camera. This overexposes the image of your license plate, rendering the picture unreadable. With PhotoBlocker, your license plate is invisible to traffic cameras yet completely legible to the naked eye." http://www.phantomplate.com/photoblocker.html

if the state was really interested in safety, they could lengthen the duration of the yellow light, not shorten it, as was done to the lights with cameras in a jurisdiction near me. They could also lengthen the delay between one direction going red and the other green...

The problem with that is that human nature being what it is, those who like to "cut it close" rationalize cutting it closer and closer, because "well, there's going to be a delay before the other light turns green anyway, so I can still make it" or " well, the yellow is going to stay yellow longer, so I can speed up and zip through." Right up until they rely on gaming the system one too many times and hit somebody, usually at a fairly high rate of speed, since they're trying to "beat" an already turned light. Extending the gaps just encourages more people to try their hands at "cutting it close," because most people are lazy and impatient and don't like to wait. I'm not a fan of traffic cameras, but extending the times just encourages more people to run lights, because it gives them a wider margin for error.

86
posted on 05/03/2012 12:13:48 PM PDT
by Hoffer Rand
(There ARE two Americas: "God's children" and the tax payers)

In a city near me, when the yellow light times were lengthened back to state engineering standards, the cameras produced so little revenue, an opt-out clause with the cameras' operator (a British firm, BTW) was triggered.

And all studies done that I've read showed that accidents increased at intersections with red light cameras. I suppose a simpleton would say well, they're less dangerous rear-enders, but, well, that's idiotic.

Studies have found that jurisdictions that implement red light cameras will usually also shorten the duration of yellow lights around the same time.

Yep.

Georgia passed a law in the last couple of years requiring traffic lights with cameras had to follow state engineering standards.

When the city of Norcross in Gwinnett County did that the revenue produced by the cameras dropped so much, it didn't even cover the camera operator's fee. Last I heard the operator was studying ways to increase revenue from the cameras(??!!).

I believe Freepers should fight red light camera tickets as they are an overreach of government and do not contribute road safety in any way. It has been documented that many cities shorten yellow lights to unsafe lengths. As locals become aware, they’re doing sudden stops and causing numerous rear-end collisions from the unaware. Check out this article from Dick Armey’s office: http://www.motorists.org/red-light-cameras/armeyreport.pdf

I agree they ought to keep yellow lights at state engineering standards. I also agree that accidents increase at intersections where they have cameras. That’s why I’m opposed to them (along with the blatant money grab issue). I thought you were advocating that lights should be set to a time a lot longer than state standards indicate. I think that’s playing with fire. It appears I misread your original post. I apologize.

91
posted on 05/03/2012 12:38:28 PM PDT
by Hoffer Rand
(There ARE two Americas: "God's children" and the tax payers)

They teach young inexperienced drives to stop or it will cost them. I do not like cameras, dealt with them in England and Brazil. But after a couple of speeding tickets even a dumba$$ like me figured out it was cheaper to slow down.

There’s a HUGE difference between RUNNNIG a red light, whether intentional or not and creeping around a corner with an incomplete total stop before doing so. There’s also a difference between running a red light and not stopping fully before tripping the camera.

The point is that it is well documented that:

(a) these cameras do not necessarily reduce accidents (some have increased rear-enders due to overly cautious sudden stopping),
(b) the gubmints in charge INTENTIONALLY adjust the yellow length downwards to increse violations,
(c) probably the same for the “inter-phase delay” (that period when ALL directions are RED) which is the best way to reduce unintentional red-light accidents (intentional ones cannot be prevented, anymore than intentional homicides can)

The bottom line is that any of these unintended infraction recording devices (red light cams, speed cams, in-vehicle black box recorders - coming to ANY new car in a few years) are unconstitutional and are just one more inch towards total control of the populace.

I have reached the point where I no longer believe that more than a few percent of USA residents can get through a single 24 hour period without violating several Local, State, and/or Federal Laws let alone the millions of “regulations” from the buggers in the alphabet agencies like EPA, DOE, DOS,TSA etc, etc, etc.

Also, there’s a good book that I checked out of the library, go to Amazon and search for it.

Then this is what I did in order:
1. Called the ticketing police department and set an appointment to view the footage and get my “late time.” (If she reads that website she’ll know what “late time” is)
2. Asked for copies of the footage while at the police department and they said I’d need to request it in a letter, which I went home and wrote.
3. In the mean time I started spending my lunch hour, which I changed to 2:00-3:00 p.m. at traffic court to get a feel for what was going on there. — this is EXTREMELY IMPORTANT!

And there’s more but if your daughter wants to put in the time, and if her ticket is $500 like mine was, it’s worth it, you can beat these.

Getting out of this ticket was one of the greatest things I’ve done. It’s been a couple years and I’m still bragging about it. Your daughter can feel this good, too, if she wants to.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.